MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193693359 · doi:10.11159/cist21.109

Reinforcement Learning for Production Planning with Demand Sensitive to Delivery Lead Time

2021· article· en· W3193693359 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chi-Yang Tsai, Erickson Liang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicScheduling and Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningProduction (economics)Lead (geology)ReinforcementComputer scienceProduction planningOn demandArtificial intelligenceEngineeringMultimediaMicroeconomicsEconomicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machine learning techniques are developing at an accelerated rate in recent years and are being applied to solve complex problems in various areas. Among them, reinforcement learning does not require a pre-determined environment model and learns from experience of interacting with the environment in the past. It has the capability to solve complex sequential decision-making problems. Companies are facing greater competition in today's fast changing markets. Delivery lead time is becoming an important factor in competition between companies for customers. If a company tends to take longer time to deliver its products, customers may grow tired of waiting and turn to other places to satisfy their needs. In addition, customers can share the experience with others more easily and more quickly through the internet and thus influence future demand of the company. It is vital for companies to cautiously manage delivery lead time in order to maintain expected service quality. Facing fast changing demand, well developed production strategies are needed, especially with limited production capacity.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Electrical Engineering and Computer Systems and ScienceSame topicScheduling and Optimization AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207